IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 21 January 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090014305
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states that he had one period of honorable service and he was going through a medical board for his feet during a 6-month period of another enlistment. He goes on to state that he was an E-5 [sergeant] and he enjoyed being a Soldier; however, he was the sole support for his mother and family and he was needed at home during his fathers last days, death, and funeral. Because his commander would not give him the hardship leave he requested, he sacrificed his career in order to care for his family. He continues by stating that he was young and in emotional turmoil and he did not handle things in a mature way that he would have liked to. He also states that he has learned much over the years and he would handle things differently now. He further states that he has matured, his life is straightened out, and he is being denied all benefits as a veteran.
3. The applicant provides three letters of support with his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the
3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant was born on 18 June 1961. He was single when he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) at Fort Jackson, SC on 19 June 1980 for a period of
4 years; training as a fire support specialist; assignment to the 2d Armored Division at Fort Hood, TX; and a cash enlistment bonus. He completed his one station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Sill, OK, and he was transferred to Fort Hood for duty as a fire support specialist. He was advanced to the rank/grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 1 November 1982.
3. On 20 December 1983, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years, assignment to Alaska, and a selective reenlistment bonus. He was married with three children at the time. On 1 April 1984, he was promoted to the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5.
4. The applicant was transferred to Alaska on 19 August 1984 with his family and was assigned to a field artillery battery at Fort Richardson, Alaska.
5. On 28 April 1987, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 17 January 1987 to 21 January 1987. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the rank/grade specialist (SPC)/E-4. He did not appeal his punishment.
6. The applicant was also barred from reenlistment on 28 April 1987.
7. On 9 June 1987, the applicant again went AWOL and he remained absent in desertion until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Bragg, NC on
7 August 1987 and charges were preferred against him for the AWOL offense.
8. The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants administrative discharge are not present in the available records because they were loaned to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in Columbia, SC in March 1988. However, the available records contain a duly-constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) which shows that the applicant was on excess leave when he was discharged on 10 November 1987, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the
service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions character of service. He had served 7 years, 2 months, and 20 days of total active service and had 62 days of lost time due to AWOL.
9. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
10. A review of his official records fails to reveal any indication that the applicant was undergoing medical processing or any indication that he was experiencing family/personal problems at the time.
11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
12. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
13. Paragraph 3-7b of the same regulation provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
3. The applicants overall record of service and the serious nature of the charges against him at the time simply does not rise to the level of a general, under honorable conditions or a fully honorable discharge.
4. After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records. In doing so he admitted guilt to the charges against him.
5. The applicants contentions and supporting documents have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently supported by the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant his requested relief.
6. Additionally, the ABCMR does not correct records solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for other programs or benefits. Every case is individually decided based upon its merits when an applicant requests an upgrade of his or her discharge.
7. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____x____ ____x____ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case
are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
___________x___________
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090014305
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090014305
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005737
On 2 March 1976, the applicant surrendered to military authorities at Fort Sill, where charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 7 January to 2 March 1976. There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. The applicants contentions have been noted; however, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021229
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions. He acknowledged in his request for discharge in lieu of court-martial that he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions. The applicant's voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011005
On 13 November 1987, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service and directed he be issued a UOTHC Discharge Certificate. The applicant indicated in the statement submitted with his request for discharge that his mother's illness, his siblings, and other family problems contributed to him going AWOL. The applicant states it has been 20 plus years since his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011258
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests his discharge be upgraded. On 10 October 1989, the applicant was separated with a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005602C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 5 April 1989, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished a discharge under other than honorable conditions. He states that he [the grandfather] was away from New Jersey and could not physically help with the children, that the applicant’s wife was living in the street, and that the children were being placed anywhere they could stay.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009346
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He states he knows he should have sought counseling but noted that unfortunately, the military was ill-equipped to handle these types of problems. He states that he served three solid years in the military and states the incident happened more than 20 years ago. The applicant was accordingly discharged on 6 October 1987 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004466
On 28 August 1989, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from on or about 23 January 1989 to on or about 9 August 1989. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. However, he did not provide evidence as to what his problems were or to what extent they existed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028334
His record contains (and he also provides) a statement rendered by Sergeant (SGT) T--d B---r, wherein he recommended that the applicant be granted an administrative discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations). He concluded that he felt it would be more beneficial to the Army, his family, and to himself to be granted an administrative discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011498
The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. On 22 March 1988, the applicant requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service). The evidence of records also shows the applicant completed the 5-week Fire Support (MOS 13F1O) Course at Fort Sill in 1986 and this course is not recorded in item 14 of his DD Form 214.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020797
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states his commander denied his requests to see a doctor for pain in his bones and joints.